Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

LOL. Do you actually think about the nonsense you post? Midnight is the very definition of middle of the night. It's one thing to take a phone call right before you go to bed, it's another to go in for a police interrogation at 11:30PM.

It wasn't 23:30. Amanda was told to go home by the police. That doesn't signify tag teams of dozens of cops just arrived from Rome hiding in the back room.

 

[Stacyhs]

I happened to catch a tv reconstruction of a very old case in which the perp got away with it as the detective who suspected him could not question him once the guy said he refused to answer any questions, thus he walked free as there was not enough evidence to prosecute.

Years later, a couple of cops decided to approach the guy under the ruse of having lost all the case notes and could he help them remember. To their amazement, he began bragging about how he'd slipped up to the galleys to take crack cocaine and then they had him! As he had just admitted to having been at the murder scene where a bar manageress had been brutally murdered. He was tried and convicted.

No lawyer present, no Miranda, when he spouted off, quite voluntarily.

As did Amanda Knox.

Bang!

Quick, Krissy! You'd better call and the Court of Cassation and let them know that they made a mistake when they ruled she was a suspect, not a witness, when she was interrogated.

 

[Stacyhs]

Of course he doesn't. He just made it up.

Like you made up the claim that Amanda told Mignini the bathroom had been cleaned the day before the murder? You've still failed to present any proof of that other than just your say-so.

 

[Vixen]

The number of hours over the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th November amounts to 53.45. It appears on a number of documents.

As to the verification of the cop numbers, you should ask your pal Mig why the high tech recording equipment in the thoroughly modern questura was switched off in order to save money, yet he spent the equivalent of the price of an Umbrian apartment on a cartoon.

No. Analysis of records, cellphones and other documents prove decisively the total hours at the Questura was just SEVENTEEN hours. In one intercepted text, Amanda moans that she is fed up waiting around without being questioned.

Raff accepts 'Soletrader's analysis as he himself is quoted by the Italian papers this recent week as saying, 'she was questioned for fifteen hours'.

Oh right, so you strongly object to the victim having representation in court by the state.

 

[Vixen]

Like you made up the claim that Amanda told Mignini the bathroom had been cleaned the day before the murder? You've still failed to present any proof of that other than just your say-so.

I gave you one of the quotes. Do look up Mignini's one-to-one interview with Amanda for yourself and then come back and acknowledge you have done so. If you still can't find it, then I'll try and help you.

I can't keep spoonfeeding you.

 

[Kauffer]

Not really. When people say, 'I think' or 'I imagine', those are superfluous to the meaning. Do you know what I mean? You know?

I think, when she says, 'I confusedly think/imagine in my head' these just signifiers of a liar, who chucks those phrases in just in case they are found out to be liars later.

In my head, I confusedly think that is what she was doing.

Not a bright post. I'll make it easier for you:

1:45 statement mentions Lumumba killing Kercher
5:45 statement makes no mention of Lumumba killing Kercher

Over the course of 4 pieces of evidence, we see a declining rate of confidence in matters of fact.

And the highest level of confidence was confused!

But I note you had absolutely no answer to my question of what Knox could possibly hope to gain, when (in your world) she deliberately, 'chomping at the bit' spontaneously named Lumumba.

Oh, and by the way, were you on a Mensa course the day the Supreme court ruled that Knox was in fact a suspect and entitled to a lawyer?

 

[Vixen]

The ECHR has taken her case.

Anybody can file an application to ECHR. As long as the complaint you are filing is timeous, you have a defendant's name and address, can cite a relevant section of the European Rights Act and hand over the fee, you, too, will get your claim accepted by the ECHR.

It does not mean the ECHR has a favourable view of your case.

What they are doing at this stage is assessing whether there is jurisdiction to hear it.

Just because CDV claims there were 'tag teams of police every hour for 53 hours and that she was brutally tortured by police', it doesn't mean the ECHR will uphold it.

Incidentally they have given it Category 3: minor legal point.

 

[Vixen]

Not a bright post. I'll make it easier for you:

1:45 memo mentions Lumumba killing Kercher
5:45 memo makes no mention of Lumumba killing Kercher

Over the course of 4 pieces of evidence, we see a declining rate of confidence in matters of fact.

And the highest level of confidence was confused!

But I note you had absolutely no answer to my question of what Knox could possibly hope to gain, when (in your world) she deliberately, 'chomping at the bit' spontaneously named Lumumba.

Oh, and by the way, were you on a Mensa course the day the Supreme court ruled that Knox was in fact a suspect and entitled to a lawyer?

Yeah, I was dancing the Time Warp.

Think hard Kauffer why would someone accuse someone else of a crime.

Think Vincent Tabor, who rang up police to finger caretaker Chris Jefferies, in the Paula Yeates murder. Like Patrick, Chris was arrested and interrogated. The red top tabloids had a field day calling him a 'pervy peeping Tom.' Turned out, Tabor was the real perp all along.

Thus we can see parallels with Amanda Knox naming Patrick. Not once. Twice.

As the Supreme Court ruled, she did it calculatingly to cover up for Rudy.

 

[Vixen]

Are you logically impaired? If you're just looking for more information it can wait for the daytime. How many non-suspects do you actually think are called in at midnight?

If it was your daughter murdered, would you want the cops to 'wait until late morning' before daring to request the presence of a key witness at the police station?

 

[Kauffer]

Anybody can file an application to ECHR. As long as the complaint you are filing is timeous, you have a defendant's name and address, can cite a relevant section of the European Rights Act and hand over the fee, you, too, will get your claim accepted by the ECHR.

It does not mean the ECHR has a favourable view of your case.

What they are doing at this stage is assessing whether there is jurisdiction to hear it.

Just because CDV claims there were tag teams of police every hour for 53 hours and that she was brutally tortured by police', it doesn't mean the ECHR will uphold it.

Incidentally they have given it Category 3: minor legal point.

No, category 3 doesn't mean a minor legal point. It means is that the ECHR view is that their case law is sufficient to adjudicate the case. It does not anticipate breaking new legal ground. So, Salduz and post Salduz case law is enough. It actually tells us quite a lot.

 

[Kauffer]

If it was your daughter murdered, would you want the cops to 'wait until late morning' before daring to request the presence of a key witness at the police station?

I thought you said Knox was not called in - that her contribution that night amounted only to a chomping at the bit spontaneous incrimination?

 

[Vixen]

LOL! That could very well describe robbery/theft of a cell phone. It's even more "legal" if the stranger asks for your wallet and you hand it over!

Really, your posts are very entertaining.

It's not the giving of the phone to the police, it's when they keep it. This is called "seizure". It means that the police consider the phone or what is on it as evidence. In this case, it was interpreted (wrongfully and no doubt intentionally so) as evidence of a conspiracy by Amanda and Patrick Lumumba to murder Meredith. The phone was not returned to Amanda that day....was entered into evidence....and for all I know the police may still have it.

That seizure is one piece of objective evidence that Amanda was a suspect before she made her first coerced statement falsely accusing Lumumba.

I also never stated that the police needed to apply for a warrant. That is something you have made up. What I wrote is that the police did not have a warrant. Whether or not the police had a warrant is merely a point of information about process, and does not affect the fact that the seizure of the phone shows that Amanda was a suspect before her first statement.

Italian law allows for the police to seize objects and documents that they reasonably believe to be associated with a crime. In urgent cases, they do not need to apply for a warrant before the seizure (CPP Article 354), but they must notify the person whose objects have been seized with a written specification of the reasons for the seizure, and also send a copy to the prosecutor. The prosecutor then either confirms the seizure with a "reasoned decree" (warrant) or has the police return the seized objects (CPP Article 355).

So much for your post's display of knowledge about law, Italian style.

The cellphone became crucial evidence, that's why it was sequestered. It was sequestered because of Amanda's reaction of shock to the see you later message and her outburst at naming Patrick as soon as a cop outside the room was overheard saying Raff had withdrawn his alibi for her.

Police, border and security staff are trained to spot the signs of extreme nervousness, such as heavy perspiration, agitation, emotional outburst and such a person will often be stopped and have their luggage or person searched. These bodily reactions are not consciously controllable and a good indicator of above normal stress. Criminal activity is highly stressful and police and border are trained to be alert to this.

 

[Vixen]

Like you made up the claim that Amanda told Mignini the bathroom had been cleaned the day before the murder? You've still failed to present any proof of that other than just your say-so.

Better informed readers of this forum will know I am right.

 

[Kauffer]

Yeah, I was dancing the Time Warp.

Think hard Kauffer why would someone accuse someone else of a crime.

Think Vincent Tabor, who rang up police to finger caretaker Chris Jefferies, in the Paula Yeates murder. Like Patrick, Chris was arrested and interrogated. The red top tabloids had a field day calling him a 'pervy peeping Tom.' Turned out, Tabor was the real perp all along.

Thus we can see parallels with Amanda Knox naming Patrick. Not once. Twice.

As the Supreme Court ruled, she did it calculatingly to cover up for Rudy.

Nope, there's no parallel. Jeffries had already been arrested for the murder. Tabak was abroad, knew this and tried to make the case against him stronger. You seem to think that it was Tabak who got Jeffries arrested. Dim. Try again.

 

[Kauffer]

No. Analysis of records, cellphones and other documents prove decisively the total hours at the Questura was just SEVENTEEN hours. In one intercepted text, Amanda moans that she is fed up waiting around without being questioned.

Raff accepts 'Soletrader's analysis as he himself is quoted by the Italian papers this recent week as saying, 'she was questioned for fifteen hours'.

Oh right, so you strongly object to the victim having representation in court by the state.

Representation by cartoon? Novel!

Here's the number of hours for you:

Amanda Knox è stata sottoposta ad esame ed attività investigative e tra il 2 e il 6 novembre 2007, fino al momento del fermo, ha fornito sommarie informazioni e risposto a domande della A.G. come segue:
2 novembre 2007, ore 15.30 VENERDI’: totale ore ………….. 12,00
Verbale di sommarie informazioni della Knox, senza indicazione della chiusura. Testimoni fino alle 3.00 am del 3 novembre 2007
3 novembre 2007, ore 14.45 SABATO totale ore ……………… 8,00
Verbale di sommarie informazioni della Knox, senza indicazione della chiusura. Testimoni indicano fino alle 22,00.
4 novembre 2007, ore 14.45 DOMENICA: totale ore …………. 12,00
Verbale di sommarie informazioni della Knox, ed accesso alla villetta di Via della Pergola dalle ore 14.45 alle ore 21. Telefonata di Amanda alla zia dice 5 ore di interrogatorio in questura
5/6 novembre 2007, ore 01.45 LUNEDI’/MARTEDI’: totale ore ……..5,00
Verbale di sommarie informazioni della Knox inizio alle ore 22.00 del 5 novembre 2009.
6 novembre 2007, ore 05.45 MARTEDI’: totale ore ……………….3,45
Verbale di “spontanee dichiarazioni” della Knox con successivo breve memoriale. Dalle ore 1,45 alle 5,45 e memoriale alle ore 14,00.
In 5 giorni la Knox è stata sentita per un totale di circa 53,45 h. Per chiarezza di esposizione si riassume la tempistica delle indagini nei confronti della Knox relativa ai cruciali giorni 5, 6 novembre 2007:

Total: 53.45 hours

 

[Vixen]

Representation by cartoon? Novel!

Here's the number of hours for you:

Amanda Knox è stata sottoposta ad esame ed attività investigative e tra il 2 e il 6 novembre 2007, fino al momento del fermo, ha fornito sommarie informazioni e risposto a domande della A.G. come segue:
2 novembre 2007, ore 15.30 VENERDI’: totale ore ………….. 12,00
Verbale di sommarie informazioni della Knox, senza indicazione della chiusura. Testimoni fino alle 3.00 am del 3 novembre 2007
3 novembre 2007, ore 14.45 SABATO totale ore ……………… 8,00
Verbale di sommarie informazioni della Knox, senza indicazione della chiusura. Testimoni indicano fino alle 22,00.
4 novembre 2007, ore 14.45 DOMENICA: totale ore …………. 12,00
Verbale di sommarie informazioni della Knox, ed accesso alla villetta di Via della Pergola dalle ore 14.45 alle ore 21. Telefonata di Amanda alla zia dice 5 ore di interrogatorio in questura
5/6 novembre 2007, ore 01.45 LUNEDI’/MARTEDI’: totale ore ……..5,00
Verbale di sommarie informazioni della Knox inizio alle ore 22.00 del 5 novembre 2009.
6 novembre 2007, ore 05.45 MARTEDI’: totale ore ……………….3,45
Verbale di “spontanee dichiarazioni” della Knox con successivo breve memoriale. Dalle ore 1,45 alle 5,45 e memoriale alle ore 14,00.
In 5 giorni la Knox è stata sentita per un totale di circa 53,45 h. Per chiarezza di esposizione si riassume la tempistica delle indagini nei confronti della Knox relativa ai cruciali giorni 5, 6 novembre 2007:

Total: 53.45 hours

May I ask your source? Would that be a Friends of Amanda advocate's guesstimate?

Thought so.

I know, it's a quote from the defense appeal submission to Hellmann.

Think of number and double it school of thought.

 

[acbytesla]

If it was your daughter murdered, would you want the cops to 'wait until late morning' before daring to request the presence of a key witness at the police station?

Oh give me a break Vixen. That is irrelevant. You don't invite non- suspects to come down in the middle of the night. Was Sophie, Filomena, Robyn, Laura, Giacomo etc. asked to come down at anytime time after 8 pm?

Whether you think they were justified is irrelevant. Whether you think Amanda/Raffaele are guilty is also irrelevant.

The only question relevant is did the Italian authorities suspect Amanda/Raffaele on November 5th/6th and did they not provide an attorney and unbiased translator?

If you're honest about it you know the answers to these questions. That's why Amanda will win in Strasbourg.

 

[Numbers]

Anybody can file an application to ECHR. As long as the complaint you are filing is timeous, you have a defendant's name and address, can cite a relevant section of the European Rights Act and hand over the fee, you, too, will get your claim accepted by the ECHR.

It does not mean the ECHR has a favourable view of your case.

What they are doing at this stage is assessing whether there is jurisdiction to hear it.

Just because CDV claims there were tag teams of police every hour for 53 hours and that she was brutally tortured by police', it doesn't mean the ECHR will uphold it.

Incidentally they have given it Category 3: minor legal point.

LOL. Thanks again for another amusing post.

Well, let's examine the humor a bit.

1. Can you provide a citation about the fee that you claim one must pay to have an application accepted at the ECHR? What is the amount of the fee?

2. The issue of Category 3 has been discussed in previous posts, and Kauffer has just reminded us of its true meaning.

ECHR has a subtle sense of humor; thus, Category 3 is the lowest of 4 categories of cases that it considers in terms of likelihood to contribute to new or modified case-law, and thus for publication in Case Reports. That is, there no new case law that ECHR thinks, at this early stage, it needs to develop to judge the Knox case against Italy. The ECHR will simply apply existing case-law, such as Salduz v. Turkey. Category 3 is also used for friendly settlements, which may suggest that ECHR may believe that Italy is likely to admit to the violations of rights claimed by Knox and compensate her with no need for an ECHR judgment.

For review, the 4 categories are:

Case Reports: Judgments, decisions and advisory opinions delivered since the inception of the new Court in 1998 which have been published or selected for publication in the Court's official Reports of Judgments and Decisions. The selection from 2007 onwards has been made by the Bureau of the Court following a proposal by the Jurisconsult. Judgments of the former Court (published in Series A and Reports of Judgments and
Decisions) and cases published in the former Commission's series Decisions and Reports have not been included in the Case Reports category and are therefore classified by levels 1, 2 and 3 only.

1 = High importance: All judgments, decisions and advisory opinions not included in the Case Reports which make a significant contribution to the development, clarification or modification of its case-law, either generally or in relation to a particular State.

2 = Medium importance: Other judgments, decisions and advisory opinions which, while not making a significant contribution to the case-law, nevertheless go beyond merely applying existing case-law.

3 = Low importance: Judgments, decisions and advisory opinions of little legal interest, namely judgments and decisions that simply apply existing case-law, friendly settlements and strike outs (unless raising a particular point of interest).

Source: http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/HUDOC_FAQ_ENG.pdf

 

[Numbers]

May I ask your source? Would that be a Friends of Amanda advocate's guesstimate?

Thought so.

I know, it's a quote from the defense appeal submission to Hellmann.

Think of number and double it school of thought.

LOL. The source is the records of the Perugia police department headquarters.

 

[Dougm]

LOL. The source is the records of the Perugia police department headquarters.